You are on page 1of 8

Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1

Introduction
Scholars debate an array of theories regarding how political power is distributed in the
United States, some arguing that power is distributed democratically while others argue that a true
oligarchy exists. In Who Rules America?, G. William Domhoff contends that the policy process is a
marionette, its strings controlled by the wealthy corporate community, which uses its economic
power to influence policy in its favor. Domhoff poses an interesting uestion to which !ristotle"s
framewor# of political regimes might be applied. In The Politics, !ristotle, too, as#s$ %If &all
should exist in a single city'both the good and the wealthy and well born, as well as a political
multitude apart from them'will there be a dispute as to which should rule( )*ord, +,-./ 0e asserts
that different governing structures, or regimes, emerge in a city depending on the relative
preeminence of these %parts( as well as the relationships among them )*ord, +1+.. !ccordingly, in
the context of Domhoff"s argument, !ristotle"s taxonomy of different regimes in The Politics
provides a useful framewor# for examining who rules !merica'and under which regime.
Aristotles Elements of Ruling
!ccording to !ristotle, %a regime is the arrangement of offices, and all distribute these either
on the basis of power of those sharing in the regime or on the basis of some euality common to
them( )*ord, +11.. In other words, authority within the regime is distributed based on the relative
power of different competing groups or is distributed according to the principle that all groups
participate eually. 2he basis for any regime is the city'or state in modern3day terms'which,
according to !ristotle develops from political partnerships among men both %for the sa#e of living
itself( and %to the extent that it falls to each to live finely( )*ord, 45.. 0ow each regime differs
from others is based on +. who exercises authority and whether through the law or through decrees,
1. their claim to rule'virtue, freedom, or wealth6 and ultimately 7. what end the regime pursues
+
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
and for whose benefit )*ord, +7,.. 8egimes pursuing the common good %according to what is
unualifiedly 9ust( are %correct( regimes, while regimes considering only what benefits the ruler are
%deviant( )*ord, 4-.. Within this framewor#, !ristotle describes three correct regimes'#ingship,
aristocracy, and polity'and their deviant counterparts'tyranny, oligarchy, and democracy.
!dditionally, regimes may be considered mixed to the extent that they share elements from these six
ma9or types of regimes. In the context of this taxonomy, the U.S. regime would be described by
some as purely democratic and by others as oligarchic. 0owever, today"s U.S. regime contains
elements not from one, but from both ma9or regime types and, therefore, is a mixed regime. 2his
mixed regime emerges from the same sources of conflict that give rise to !ristotle"s democracies
and oligarchies. !s !ristotle asserts, the well off and the poor comprise the ma9or segments of the
state and %on account of the fact that the former are for the most part few and the latter many, these
parts appear :the most; opposed of the parts of the city. !ccordingly, regimes are instituted on the
basis of the sorts of preeminence associated with these, and there are held to be two sorts of
regimes, democracy and oligarchy( )*ord, +15..
Aristotles Democracies and the U.S
!ristotle argues that democracy exists when all free and poor persons have authority,
regardless of whether they comprise the ma9ority relative to the wealthy )*ord, 4<.. It simply %turns
out that the former are many and the latter few,( which often results in democracy and oligarchy too
narrowly defined based on the number, rather than on class )*ord, +11.. !ccording to !ristotle, five
variations on democracy exist, and while some elements apply, no single type captures the U.S.
regime today.
In the first type of democracy, authority of those ruling is derived from law and is based on
euality. 2he poor and well off %participate in the regime as far as possible in similar fashion(
1
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
)*ord, +1-.. Since all are eual and %what is resolved by the ma9ority is authoritative,( then this
ualifies as a democracy. 2hose who believe that this first type prevails in the U.S. may cite from
the Declaration of Independence that %all men are created eual( as evidence for their argument.
2his may be true in principle, but it does not play out in reality. 2he corporate community in the
U.S. moves its policies onto the agenda and through the legislative process at the expense of other
groups" preferences by using its structural economic power to influence elected public officials and
to shape public opinion )Domhoff, +=+3+=1.. 2hus, there is class domination despite individual
rights and freedoms )Domhoff, +=7..
2he second variation on democracy arises when %offices are filled on the basis of
assessments( )*ord, +1-.. 2he assessments, however, are low and governing offices are open to all
citi>ens who can afford to pay )*ord, +1-.. While those running for political office in the U.S. do
not pay assessments, per se, the expense of campaigning is exorbitant and, therefore serves as a
formidable barrier to entering politics for most people. 2he expense increases significantly
depending on the level of office'and, accordingly, on the level of potential policy influence.
Domhoff argues that because the candidate selection process is individualistic and dependent upon
name recognition and personal image, %it can be in good part controlled by members of the power
elite through large campaign contributions( )+7?.. In other words, %it is li#e a high3sta#es po#er
game$ anyone is welcome as long as they have a million dollars to wager( )Domhoff, +7<..
!ristotle"s third type of democracy occurs when %all citi>ens of unuestioned decent share,
but the law rules( and the fourth type of democracy emerges when all citi>ens can parta#e in office,
but law rules )*ord, +1-.. Some could argue that this third form of democracy is pluralism at wor#
'power is dispersed among the general public in that citi>ens can influence the direction of policy
by shaping public opinion and lobbying elected officials through voluntary associations and by
7
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
supporting candidates with whom they agree on issues of importance )Domhoff, +=7.. !ristotle
implies that under this regime, the ability of all citi>ens to share means the ability of all citi>ens to
influence policy outcomes as long as they use processes that abide by the law. 2his, however, is not
always the case in the U.S. @vidence on the influence of voting on legislation in the U.S. is
uestionable, and the two3party system motivates candidates to appeal to centrist voters by avoiding
clear3cut policy positions which ma#es it easier for the corporate community to influence public
officials once elected to office )Domhoff, +=7.. !s for the fourth type of democracy, it is clear that
most citi>ens possessing the financial means and support from the corporate community can hold
office, while others face substantial barriers.
Ainally, !ristotle"s fifth variation on democracy occurs when the ma9ority has authority not
by law, but via a popular leader who issues decrees )*ord, +1-.. 0owever, in !ristotle"s view, this
last type does not ualify as a true regime because %where the laws do not rule there is no regime(
)*ord, +1?.. 2he Bresident of the U.S. is elected not by a direct popular vote, but indirectly by the
people through the plurality voting system of the @lectoral College. !dditionally, the law6 the
chec#s and balances that distribute decision3ma#ing power among the executive, legislative, and
9udicial branches of the federal government6 and the federalism3based relationship between the
federal and state governments preclude the rise of popular leaders who issue policy decisions that
are above the law and that exercise absolute authority over other decision3ma#ing bodies.
Aristotles Oligarchies and the U.S.
!ristotle asserts that a regime is oligarchic %when it is not open to all actually to share in
office in spite of being full citi>ens( )*ord, +1<.. Dore specifically, the extent that citi>ens are able
to participate in an oligarchic regime is based on wealth$ %what ma#es democracy and oligarchy
differ is poverty and wealth$ wherever some rule on account of wealth, whether a minority or a
5
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
ma9ority, this is necessarily an oligarchy, and wherever those who are poor, a democracy )*ord, 4<..
2hus, oligarchies emerge when the wealthy rule, regardless of whether they are large or small in
number.
!ristotle"s oligarchies arise in four forms. 2he first form occurs in a way similar to the
second type of democracy described above'offices are filled on the basis of assessments. *i#e the
democratic regime, offices are open to all who are able to pay the assessments. Unli#e in the
democratic regime, though, the assessments are so large as to exclude the poor even though they are
the ma9ority )*ord, +1?.. !s a result, only the wealthy are able to participate in what is ostensibly an
open regime, but in reality is a closed oligarchic regime.
!ristotle"s second variation on oligarchy arises when offices are filled on the basis of large
assessments'as in the first form'but those leaving office choose their successors from only
certain citi>ens, such as those deemed capable of paying the large assessment. !s !ristotle
describes, %they themselves elect from the others who are to enter the governing body, :but; as they
are not yet strong enough to rule without the law, they ma#e a law of this sort( )*ord, +1=..
Ainally, the third and fourth forms of oligarchy emerge when sons succeed their fathers in
office, but in one regime law rules and in the other %officials rule( )*ord, +1?31<..
2he modern3day U.S. regime exhibits some, but not all of the characteristics of !ristotle"s
variations on oligarchies. Everall, despite the si>e of the middle class in the U.S., what !ristotle
calls the %middling element, ( the distributive power of the corporate community'or its ability to
prevail over other competing groups'is evident in its influence over the policy planning process,
public opinion, election outcomes, and selection of government appointees )Domhoff, ?4, +,+, +7?,
+-,.. In other words, the economic power of the corporate community allows its members to
penetrate the policyma#ing process via multiple and diverse avenues. Similar to the second form of
-
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
democracy, an element of !ristotle"s second type of oligarchy appears in the form of large financial
barriers to campaigning for most levels of political office. 2hese are not assessments, per se, but the
cost of running for office excludes a large segment of the population from running despite being
eligible for office. !lthough it is not uncommon that children will succeed their parents in office
)e.g., George W. Fush succeeded his father, George 0.W. Fush. for the office of the Bresidency,
albeit not in consecutive terms., family dynasties do not have a monopoly over political office in the
U.S. Doreover, the law is the authoritative element in the U.S. regime, not individual officials.
Aristotles Mixed Regimes and the U.S.
!ristotle refers to the mixture of democracy and oligarchy as a polity, one of the three
correct regimes described above )*ord, +7,.. Dore formally, !ristotle describes the development of
the mixed polity regime arising from combining legislative elements from a democracy and an
oligarchy in three different ways$ +. ta#ing all elements from each regime, 1. ta#ing the %mean(
between elements from each regime, and 7. ta#ing a %selection( of elements from each regime
'%some from the oligarchic law and some from the democratic( )*ord, +7+.. !s a result, %the
defining principle of a good mixture of democracy and oligarchy is that it should be possible for the
same polity to be spo#en of as either a democracy or an oligarchy( )*ord, +71.. 2he modern3day
U.S. regime shares elements from both !ristotle"s democracies and oligarchies and, therefore, can
be described not as either democratic or oligarchic, but as a polity. Arom !ristotle"s democracies,
the U.S. regime operates according to the principle that all citi>ens participate eually through the
right to vote, the right to run for office, and the right to participate in the policyma#ing process via
such other means as lobbying. Arom !ristotle"s oligarchies, the U.S. regime, in practice, is to a large
extent controlled by the wealthy'the corporate elite'and ensures that government offices will be
held primarily by only those who can afford the costs of campaigning.
?
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
Dore broadly, the U.S. regime is mixed based on the three elements in which regimes differ
'who exercises authority, their claim to rule, and what end the regime pursues and for whose
benefit. 2he wealthy corporate community exercises its authority through its economic power, but
the ma9ority exercises authority through the power of voting as well as other forms of mass political
influence based on strength in numbers rather than on the power of the dollar. 2he corporate
community"s claim to rule is the influence of its wealth'albeit not overtly'while the ma9ority"s
claim to rule is freedom, or the irrefutable tenet that the U.S. is founded on the eual participation
by all. Ainally, the corporate community see#s an end that benefits its members often at the expense
of the ma9ority, while the ma9ority see#s an end unli#ely to benefit the corporate elite )e.g., the
progressive income tax system and other wealth redistribution policies..
Conclusion
!ccording to !ristotle"s taxonomy of regimes, the U.S. is neither a democracy nor an
oligarchy'not by which group exercises authority, its claim to rule, nor by a common, shared end
pursued by all citi>ens. 8ather, the U.S. regime combines elements from both democracies and
oligarchies and, therefore, would be described by !ristotle as a polity. !s a result, the U.S. regime
may be characteri>ed more as a correct than a deviant regime'it is a mean between two regimes
that otherwise are deviant on their own due to the imbalance of power leaning either toward the
wealthy corporate community or toward the ma9ority. !s !ristotle might describe it, %it has
happened :in the U.S.; that the regime in so far as it is based on the laws tends toward the popular,
but through the citi>ens" upbringing and habits tends to be oligarchically run( )*ord, +1<..
<
Lauren Silver POLS 500 Paper #1
References
*ord, Carnes. )+4=5.. !ristotle$ 2he Bolitics. Chicago and *ondon$ 2he University of Chicago
Bress.
Domhoff, G. William. )1,,1.. Who 8ules !merica/ 2he United States$ DcGraw 0ill Companies,
Inc.
=

You might also like